- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message

Calling my shot: Mueller report will be on "Blast"; Horowitz on "Mute"
Posted on 5/4/18 at 11:09 am
Posted on 5/4/18 at 11:09 am
The more I read about what Horowitz is finding (albeit through "sources" articles), it seems to me that Mueller was a fundamentally bad choice for leading the probe. Given that it was almost certainly going to reach into the FBI, his history there should have been disqualifying.
In my previous job, I was president of a manufacturing company that had underperformed for a long time. I soon figured out what I felt were the steps I needed to take to fix things, but almost all of them were unrolling stuff done under my boss over the last 5 years. He clearly was not going to go to the overall CEO and present my conclusions on that, so I spent a lot of time arguing with him until he was finally fired.
All that to say, Horowitz SEEMS to be pulling no punches. If his report does indeed paint a picture of a poisoned FBI leadership that hates Trump, that will be deflected and rationalized.
If and when Mueller comes out with a report that slams Trump, not a thing will be said to question how his conclusions are tainted by his desire to avoid going too far into how the FBI got to where it is at least partially under his leadership.
TL:DR version: Water is wet.
In my previous job, I was president of a manufacturing company that had underperformed for a long time. I soon figured out what I felt were the steps I needed to take to fix things, but almost all of them were unrolling stuff done under my boss over the last 5 years. He clearly was not going to go to the overall CEO and present my conclusions on that, so I spent a lot of time arguing with him until he was finally fired.
All that to say, Horowitz SEEMS to be pulling no punches. If his report does indeed paint a picture of a poisoned FBI leadership that hates Trump, that will be deflected and rationalized.
If and when Mueller comes out with a report that slams Trump, not a thing will be said to question how his conclusions are tainted by his desire to avoid going too far into how the FBI got to where it is at least partially under his leadership.
TL:DR version: Water is wet.
Posted on 5/4/18 at 11:17 am to Ag Zwin
Bottom line the report will show sabotage, abuse of power, sedition, criminal wrong doing, political espionage, the FBO/DOJ as democrat campaign headquarters; while showing Comey called FD 302's his diary.
So this is why they want to get Trump on the ridiculous campaign finance law that CNN is saying is a felony. It is not, it is a fine and slap on the wrist. But campaign funds weren't used and no one GAF who Trump fricked 20 years ago or yesterday. So they will go back to saying Trump is mentally unstable and never laughs
So this is why they want to get Trump on the ridiculous campaign finance law that CNN is saying is a felony. It is not, it is a fine and slap on the wrist. But campaign funds weren't used and no one GAF who Trump fricked 20 years ago or yesterday. So they will go back to saying Trump is mentally unstable and never laughs
Posted on 5/4/18 at 11:19 am to Ag Zwin
quote:
All that to say, Horowitz SEEMS to be pulling no punches. If his report does indeed paint a picture of a poisoned FBI leadership that hates Trump
Kind of disagree. Horowitz’ report will be fact based. Just like the McCabe report. Painting is not the intetention of Horowitz. Presenting facts is the objective.
With that said the facts will show that a small group in leadership of the FBI hates Trump.
quote:
that will be deflected and rationalized.
Of course. However not so much in a court of law.
Posted on 5/4/18 at 11:26 am to cajunangelle
quote:
It is not, it is a fine and slap on the wrist.
It’s not even a slap on the wrist (if we are talking about the same thing...paying Stormy $130K for the NDA).
quote:
But campaign funds weren't used
Right. That’s why it’s not an issue. But that doesn’t preclude CNN lying about it.
Posted on 5/4/18 at 11:29 am to Ag Zwin
If the IG report doesn’t result in some arrest and trump firing RR and or mueller unless you believe Q than trump got some issues
Posted on 5/4/18 at 11:47 am to Ag Zwin
quote:I understand where you're coming from. I was hired to take over a division of a large company that had been under-performing for a very long time, and the leadership had been ousted. The employees under him, however, had loved him, because he was a jovial fellow that wanted to be friends with everyone and he let sloppy work and a laggard effort slide. I was fought at every step of the way as I brought in new technologies, implemented new procedures to enhance productivity and generally, and shook up the status quo, moving people into new roles requiring them to take training and be graded based on solid metrics. Revenue shot up over the next year by more than 160%, but the employees still fought change even though the "facts" were right there for everyone to see. After a couple of years, I bailed on it because it was just a toxic atmosphere of lazy employees who resented actually having to work and I didn't want to stick around and try to change a whole corporate culture.
Ag Zwin
Posted on 5/4/18 at 1:07 pm to HubbaBubba
quote:
I understand where you're coming from. I was hired to take over a division of a large company that had been under-performing for a very long time, and the leadership had been ousted. The employees under him, however, had loved him, because he was a jovial fellow that wanted to be friends with everyone and he let sloppy work and a laggard effort slide. I was fought at every step of the way as I brought in new technologies, implemented new procedures to enhance productivity and generally, and shook up the status quo, moving people into new roles requiring them to take training and be graded based on solid metrics. Revenue shot up over the next year by more than 160%, but the employees still fought change even though the "facts" were right there for everyone to see. After a couple of years, I bailed on it because it was just a toxic atmosphere of lazy employees who resented actually having to work and I didn't want to stick around and try to change a whole corporate culture.
Here's irony for you.
I was fired about 2 months after he (the group CEO above me) was, since I was one of his decisions, too. CFO for the group gone, too, just on principle. Weird decision-making processes there. I remember when I convened the first dealer meeting the company had held in over 6 years, and one of them pulling me aside to ask if I was going to stick around. When I asked why he wondered, he said it was because I was the 4th president he had dealt with over the last 7 years.
Fast forward to now. I just got off the phone with the current president, who also goes to our church and whose kids we looked after yesterday when his flight home was delayed and his wife had to catch a plane. (He was hired over a year after I left while they test-drove one of my VP's. This guy had done quite a bit to push me out, along with a couple others I should have fired.)
Anyway, the reason he called was because I bought their biggest dealership and we were setting up the visit next week to our main store by him and the newly-hired replacement for the putz boss I had to deal with. That seat sat vacant for over 2 years, and if I were still there, she would be my boss.
It was after that experience that I decided I would never work for someone else and be subject to corporate politics again.
Popular
Back to top
5







